Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26316701›Full record

Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2015

Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability study of two ondansetron oral soluble film formulations in fasting healthy male Chinese volunteers.

Yubing Zhu, Qian Zhang, Jianjun Zou, Meng Wan, Zheng Zhao, Junrong Zhu

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yubing ZhuDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
Qian ZhangDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
Jianjun ZouLaboratory of Clinical Pharmacology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
Meng WanDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
Zheng ZhaoDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
Junrong ZhuDepartment of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOndansetron oral soluble film is designed to be applied on top of the tongue without requiring water to aid dissolution or swallowing, which is especially fitting for nausea and vomiting patients. PURPOSE: This study was conducted to compare the bioavailability of two 8 mg ondansetron oral soluble film formulations. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis randomized, open-label, two-period crossover study was performed under fasting conditions. A total of ten eligible subjects were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive a single 8 mg dose of the test and reference ondansetron oral soluble film formulations, followed by a 1-week washout period and administration of the alternate formulation. The concentrations of ondansetron were assayed using an liquid chromatograph-mass spectrometer/mass spectrometer (LC-MS/MS) method. For analysis of pharmacokinetic properties, including the peak concentration of T max (C max), AUC from time 0 (baseline) to t hours (AUC0- t ), and AUC from baseline to infinity (AUC0-∞), blood samples were obtained at intervals over the 24-hour period after studying drug administration. Tolerability was assessed by monitoring vital signs and laboratory tests (hematology, blood biochemistry, hepatic function, and urinalysis) and by questioning subjects about adverse events.

resultsThe mean (standard derivation [SD]) relative bioavailability was 96.5 (23.7%). The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the log-transformed ratios of C max and AUC0- t were 84.71%-103.28% and 91.38%-108.60%, respectively (P>0.05). Similar results were found for the data without log-transformation. No statistically significant differences were found based on analysis of variance. No significant adverse events occurred or were reported during the study.

conclusionAs the 90% CIs based on the differences between the test and reference formulation were within the 80%-125% range for both the C max and AUC0- t , we concluded that the two formulations were bioequivalent with respect to the rate or the extent of absorption. Both formulations are well tolerated.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAdolescentAdultAntiemeticsArea Under CurveAsian PeopleBiological AvailabilityChemistry, PharmaceuticalChinaChromatography, High Pressure LiquidCross-Over StudiesDosage FormsGastrointestinal AbsorptionHalf-LifeHealthy VolunteersHumansAntiemeticsDosage FormsOndansetronSerotonin AntagonistsbioequivalenceLC-MS/MSondansetronoral soluble film

Identifiers

PMID26316701
PMCPMC4541558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.